AMD Ryzen 3 210 vs AMD Ryzen 5 4500 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 4500 and AMD Ryzen 3 210 present a stark contrast in design philosophy and benchmark results. The Ryzen 5 4500 is a desktop part built on the Zen 2 architecture, while the Ryzen 3 210 is a mobile processor using the newer Zen 4 architecture. Despite the older architecture, the Ryzen 5 4500 wins the majority of the head-to-head tests, leveraging its higher core count and thread count to dominate in multi-threaded workloads. The Ryzen 3 210, however, counters with significant wins in single-thread performance and specific tasks, showcasing the raw power of newer Zen 4 cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Ryzen 5 4500 establishes a decisive lead in almost every multi-threaded benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 13677 against the Ryzen 3 210's 11198, a 22.1% advantage. This pattern is consistent across the Cinebench suite, with the Ryzen 5 4500 winning R15 multi-core (1378 vs 1128) and R20 multi-core (5744 vs 4703) by approximately 22%. The data indicates that the 6-core/12-thread configuration of the Ryzen 5 4500 provides a substantial throughput advantage over the 4-core/8-thread Ryzen 3 210 in rendering workloads.

The Ryzen 5 4500's dominance extends to PassMark's processor tests. In data compression, it scores 228741 versus 152017, a massive 50.5% lead. Data encryption shows an even larger gap, with the Ryzen 5 4500 ahead by 58% (13597 vs 8607). Integer math performance is also strongly in favor of the Ryzen 5 4500, with a 31% lead (49707 vs 37933), and floating-point math shows a 24.3% advantage (29405 vs 23649). Extended instructions tests reveal a 32.3% lead for the Ryzen 5 4500, and random string sorting shows a 23.3% advantage. Even in the PassMark multi-thread test, the Ryzen 5 4500 leads by 18.4% (16091 vs 13585).

The Ryzen 3 210's wins are concentrated in areas that highlight its architectural efficiency and higher boost clock. The most striking victory is in PassMark single-thread performance, where it scores 3724 versus the Ryzen 5 4500's 2593, a 30.4% lead. This is a significant margin, demonstrating the superior instructions-per-clock (IPC) of the Zen 4 architecture. The Ryzen 3 210 also wins in PassMark physics (821 vs 726, an 11.6% lead) and in the find prime numbers test (49 vs 34, a 30.6% lead). These specific wins show that for tasks that rely on a single core or exhibit high single-threaded demands, the Ryzen 3 210 is the clear winner.

Interestingly, the Cinebench single-core results contradict the PassMark single-thread result. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen 5 4500 wins with a score of 1930 versus 1581, a 22.1% lead. This discrepancy is notable; while the Ryzen 3 210 is ahead in the PassMark single-thread test, it loses in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests by roughly 22% each. The data shows that the Ryzen 5 4500 wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Ryzen 3 210 wins only 4.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear picture for different use cases. The Ryzen 5 4500 is the undisputed choice for multi-threaded productivity. Its consistent 18-58% lead across PassMark and Cinebench multi-core tests makes it the superior option for video editing, 3D rendering, software compilation, and any workload that can utilize its 12 threads. The data shows that the extra two cores and four threads provide a significant performance buffer in these scenarios.

The Ryzen 3 210, despite its losses in core-heavy tasks, has a distinct advantage in specific scenarios. Its 30.4% lead in PassMark single-thread performance suggests it would be better suited for older or less-optimized games that rely heavily on a single core's speed. However, the Cinebench single-core results complicate this narrative, as the Ryzen 5 4500 leads there. For a user primarily focused on light, bursty tasks that are not fully multi-threaded, the Ryzen 3 210's architecture offers a compelling efficiency advantage, especially considering its 28W TDP compared to the Ryzen 5 4500's 65W TDP.

The overall average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the Ryzen 5 4500 at 17333 and the Ryzen 3 210 at 17321, a difference of only 0.1%. This near-parity in the aggregate score is misleading, as it masks the vastly different performance profiles. The Ryzen 5 4500 is the workhorse for parallel processing, while the Ryzen 3 210 is a sprinter for highly single-threaded tasks. The choice comes down to the user's workload, not the overall average.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two CPUs is fundamental. The Ryzen 5 4500 is built on the Zen 2 architecture (codename Renoir) using a 7 nm process node from TSMC, with a die size of 156 mm² and containing 9,800 million transistors. In contrast, the Ryzen 3 210 is based on the newer Zen 4 architecture (codename Hawk Point) fabricated on a more advanced 4 nm process, with a smaller die size of 137 mm² but a much higher transistor count of 20,900 million. This newer process allows for higher clock speeds and better power efficiency.

The core configurations differ significantly. The Ryzen 5 4500 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Ryzen 3 210 has 4 cores and 8 threads. This difference is the primary driver of the Ryzen 5 4500's multi-threaded dominance. The cache hierarchy also differs: the Ryzen 5 4500 has 512 KB of L2 cache per core, while the Ryzen 3 210 has 1 MB per core. Both have 8 MB of shared L3 cache and 64 KB of L1 cache per core.

Memory support is another major divergence. The Ryzen 5 4500 supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The Ryzen 3 210 supports the newer DDR5 standard, also dual-channel, but with a significantly higher bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. This higher bandwidth could benefit integrated graphics and certain memory-sensitive workloads. The platform sockets are incompatible: the Ryzen 5 4500 uses AMD Socket AM4, while the Ryzen 3 210 uses AMD Socket FP7, indicating different target platforms (desktop versus mobile). Furthermore, the Ryzen 5 4500 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, whereas the Ryzen 3 210 is locked. The Ryzen 3 210 also includes integrated Radeon 740M graphics, a feature absent in the Ryzen 5 4500, which requires a discrete GPU. PCIe support also differs, with the Ryzen 5 4500 offering Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only) and the Ryzen 3 210 offering Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only).

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher single-thread score in PassMark?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 210 wins in PassMark single-thread performance, scoring 3724 compared to the AMD Ryzen 5 4500's 2593, a 30.4% difference.

Q: What is the difference in multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4500 scores 13677 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 22.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen 3 210's score of 11198.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4500 has a base clock of 3.60 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen 3 210's base clock of 3.00 GHz.

Q: Do these CPUs support the same memory type?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 5 4500 supports DDR4 memory, while the AMD Ryzen 3 210 supports DDR5 memory.

Q: What are the respective TDPs of these processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4500 has a TDP of 65W, while the AMD Ryzen 3 210 has a TDP of 28W.

Q: Which CPU includes integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 210 includes integrated Radeon 740M graphics, while the AMD Ryzen 5 4500 does not have integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 4500 is the clear winner for multi-threaded workloads. It wins in all Cinebench multi-core tests (R15, R20, R23) by approximately 22% and dominates PassMark tests like data compression (50.5% lead), data encryption (58% lead), and integer math (31% lead). This makes it the better choice for content creation, 3D rendering, video encoding, and any application that can spread its work across many threads. Its wins in PassMark floating-point math and extended instructions also indicate strength in scientific computing and complex calculations.

The AMD Ryzen 3 210 wins in specific areas that highlight its architectural efficiency. Its 30.4% lead in PassMark single-thread performance makes it a better choice for legacy applications or tasks that are inherently single-threaded and sensitive to clock speed and IPC. The wins in PassMark physics (11.6% lead) and find prime numbers (30.6% lead) suggest it has an edge in certain simulation and mathematical workloads. Given its much lower TDP of 28W and integrated Radeon 740M graphics, it is also the better option for a compact, power-efficient system where a discrete GPU is not an option. The Ryzen 5 4500, with its 65W TDP and lack of integrated graphics, requires a dedicated graphics card and a more robust cooling solution.